🔗 Share this article

If the current year was already shaping up to be the worst year of the century for the international system established after WWII, recent days proved to be its most destructive week yet. Israel deepened its disregard for international conventions by sending 10 fighter jets to Qatar, bombing a Hamas delegation participating in ceasefire talks within Qatar’s capital. The last meaningful forum for diplomatic negotiation may now have vanished completely.

No fewer than a group of unmanned aerial vehicles from Russia breached the territorial skies of Poland. For the first time, Nato airpower were deployed against enemy targets within the borders of a member nation. Regardless of if the incursion was a technical mishap or intentional testing by Moscow, according to analysts in the West, this was the nearest the world has come to open conflict after WWII,” Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, said.

And then, Charlie Kirk, an outspoken right-wing figure and staunch supporter of Trump, was shot dead during a speech to university attendees and Maga supporters on a campus in Utah. Without evidence of the shooter’s identity or motives, Trump immediately blamed “those on the radical left,” claiming they of rhetoric “directly responsible to acts of terror occurring currently across the nation today.”

When questioned about the divided nation might reconcile after Kirk’s assassination, Trump said he was indifferent”. His explanation proved alarming: “The radicals on the right are radical because they don’t want to see crime … Leftist activists pose the real threat – and they are vicious and horrible and strategically clever.” This is how political division transforms into group mentality. This is how the spiral of hatred rush headlong into irreversible conflict.

In reality, over 75% of deaths linked to extremism in the US over the last 10 years were perpetrated by individuals on the far right, with the radical left responsible for just a small number of these incidents. The former president denounced political violence broadly the following day – but did not acknowledge a series of recent of attacks against Democrats, including several killings. To him, the problem is perpetually others, and not the loyal supporters constituting his base.

The political and cultural aftershocks of Kirk’s death will no doubt unfold in the coming weeks, yet the gravest risk amid deep divisions is that the shooting becomes the historical parallel in contemporary times. That arson attack on 27 February 1933 marked Germany’s pivot away from democracy toward autocratic rule. The Nazi leader, freshly installed as chancellor, seized the moment to eliminate the freedoms of the Weimar constitution – expression, press, organizational liberty, public gathering.

“Anyone who stands in our way will be cut down,” he said, inspecting the arsoned building. Numerous leftist activists found themselves imprisoned, including all 81 Communist deputies in parliament. Once opposition was suppressed, the ruling party swiftly consolidated power.

Within modern America, Kirk’s death has captivated the nation, energizing political bases and Trump’s supporters, a fact he recognizes. An extremist figure, Matt Forney, demanded detainment of all opposing lawmakers, openly claiming the murder as a pivotal turning point.

The reality is, this incident serves as that could rescue a struggling administration plagued with a sharp drop in employment figures, currency devaluation, and a housing crisis. The former president grieved as though he were family, yet his language implied it might become as much about pursuing Trump’s enemies rather than justice. Right after the assassination, he vowed to pursue “each and every one of those who contributed in this tragedy … even groups that fund and support it.” He specifically mentioned a billionaire philanthropist, a donor to liberal causes and Democrat donor. He is dangerous,” he informed a news outlet, he “should be put in jail.”

The reasons for Kirk’s killing remains unclear. Ideological leanings belonging to the attacker, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, appear as muddled as those of Thomas Matthew Crooks, a young man who attempted to assassinate the former president at a rally. Is this truly the radical left attacking right-wing figures – or is it the strange, chaotic subculture from internet forums entering reality? Phrases etched on to ammunition shells in Utah read less like an ideological manifesto and more like a mix of puerile memes and virtual world allusions.

Yet concerns arise that suppression of dissenting scholars, legal professionals, journalists, government employees, military officers, and judicial figures in the US will intensify. Thus far, reactions on social media have led to a wave of sackings and diplomatic staff have warned foreign nationals not to praise or joking about the murder, instructing consulates to take “appropriate action” toward individuals engaging in such behavior.

The former president has often prospered amid turmoil and instability. Where real crises do not exist, he invents scenarios – including imagined crime pandemics in major cities, Washington DC and Chicago. Manufactured unrest fuels his power grab. Currently, he possesses an ideal opportunity. It is understandable he shows no concern if the nation comes together.

This incident offers an ideal justification to strengthen control, muzzling opposition, and concentrating power – so that his successors may inherit total governmental power, regardless of personal appeal, qualifications or electoral support. After all, all authoritarian regimes must be established initially; after consolidation, it is simpler to maintain.

Liberal democracy and the rules-based global order are far from perfect, but they have delivered peace, progress and prosperity – the very opposite of authoritarianism. Implying that the US, a founder of modern systems, could soon slide into full-blown autocracy, its leaders thinking historical extremist mindsets, could appear unlikely.

However, alternatively, it is not far-fetched at all. Authoritarian rule was still within living memory when many of us even at the heart of contemporary Western nations came of age. From Belgium to Bulgaria, numerous households have some history of fatalities, devastation, hatred and destitution that authoritarianism leaves behind. To safeguard their near future, they may want to consult historical lessons.